CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 13)
Discussion
Wattyler said:
Why do you believe that account is a trustworthy source?https://twitter.com/thek2212/status/14044001497580... do you believe that as well, or that Kate Garraway is part of a conspiracy? https://twitter.com/thek2212/status/13427441332832...
Or nurses being given £200 each to keep quiet about the 'scamdemic' ? https://twitter.com/thek2212/status/13115432273092... - she says thats her niece telling her as well...!
The whole feed is bats
t IMHO, and quite sad to read. sim72 said:
This fella might not be an typical anti-vaxxer, but is insinuating ... well, read it.
And let's not start on the Schwab / WEF / Great Reset ones ...
July 19th probably needed to be done. It might go OK, it might be terrible. But the reasons for it aren't any of those things.
Why is asking the question about whether we got this all out of proportion deemed some kind of conspiracy? Yes we had a lot of excess deaths in the extremely elderly and vulnerable the past year, but the year before that we had a lot less. And we are seeing a 17 week rolling negative excess death streak which is unprecedented. So I am not concluding, just asking the question perhaps we just saw a bit of a flu/cold spike that just saw off people that were end of life anyway. Why is that a hard concept to accept? Is it because it would mean admitting we had been sold a dummy? What is it about the truth we don’t like?And let's not start on the Schwab / WEF / Great Reset ones ...
July 19th probably needed to be done. It might go OK, it might be terrible. But the reasons for it aren't any of those things.
Phil. said:
For interest. If you are double jabbed with a vax passport and preset either a positive LFT/PCR result, the vax passport disappears immediately from the NHS App.
Waiting to discover if it reappears so quickly after 10 days isolating and whether it’s based on being double vaxxed or having been positive.
I'm not entirely clear on what benefit there is to getting jabbed if having it still means one is treated the same as us filthy unvaxxed scum.Waiting to discover if it reappears so quickly after 10 days isolating and whether it’s based on being double vaxxed or having been positive.
Not that there should be any difference in treatment anyway, of course.
Wattyler said:
Er, wtf?That seems to be saying that they are using 40 or 45 cycle threshold at the present time, and have been for months??
EDIT: It's FOI reference 07.21.04
Edited by RSTurboPaul on Friday 9th July 20:05
RSTurboPaul said:
I'm not quite sure what you are saying here.
The DM article sets out the situation in terms of antibody response produced from booster jabs (10x more than two jabs?! which seems an insanely large amount if two jabs already protects by, what, 85? 90? 95 percent relative risk reduction?) but also sets out that even the CDC has said booster jabs are not needed yet, meanwhile Pfizer (a private company interested in a large turnover and profit margin for shareholders and Executives, obviously) says a third jab is definitely needed.
'The science', therefore, is not showing that a third jab is necessary, while a profit-motivated Big Pharma company with obvious ulterior motive, says it is.
I'm not sure that the post that has been written is therefore 'anti-vax'? Rather, it is just pointing out the obvious motivations that might be driving the position of Big Pharma when 'the science' says something else.
I only went back one page. The number of posts casting doubt on the efficacy / necessity / possible side-effects of the vaccines are significant. There were a number of posts last week saying that because more people who had been jabbed had died that those who hadn't , the vaccines didn't work - when not only the obvious reason was the difference in demographics, but that wasn't actually what the data said anyway. Copying nonsense off Twitter is never a good idea. The DM article sets out the situation in terms of antibody response produced from booster jabs (10x more than two jabs?! which seems an insanely large amount if two jabs already protects by, what, 85? 90? 95 percent relative risk reduction?) but also sets out that even the CDC has said booster jabs are not needed yet, meanwhile Pfizer (a private company interested in a large turnover and profit margin for shareholders and Executives, obviously) says a third jab is definitely needed.
'The science', therefore, is not showing that a third jab is necessary, while a profit-motivated Big Pharma company with obvious ulterior motive, says it is.
I'm not sure that the post that has been written is therefore 'anti-vax'? Rather, it is just pointing out the obvious motivations that might be driving the position of Big Pharma when 'the science' says something else.
There are clearly real discussions to be had (i.e. vaccinating 12-18s), but it's often difficult to do when people are posting "facts", which while some have value, a large amount are social media posts from the delusional. And arguing with the delusional is never worthwhile.
robuk said:
Wattyler said:
Why do you believe that account is a trustworthy source?https://twitter.com/thek2212/status/14044001497580... do you believe that as well, or that Kate Garraway is part of a conspiracy? https://twitter.com/thek2212/status/13427441332832...
Or nurses being given £200 each to keep quiet about the 'scamdemic' ? https://twitter.com/thek2212/status/13115432273092... - she says thats her niece telling her as well...!
The whole feed is bats
t IMHO, and quite sad to read. I assume it will appear on there if/when uploaded.
https://www.cddft.nhs.uk/about-the-trust/freedom-o...
jameswills said:
sim72 said:
This fella might not be an typical anti-vaxxer, but is insinuating ... well, read it.
And let's not start on the Schwab / WEF / Great Reset ones ...
July 19th probably needed to be done. It might go OK, it might be terrible. But the reasons for it aren't any of those things.
Why is asking the question about whether we got this all out of proportion deemed some kind of conspiracy? Yes we had a lot of excess deaths in the extremely elderly and vulnerable the past year, but the year before that we had a lot less. And we are seeing a 17 week rolling negative excess death streak which is unprecedented. So I am not concluding, just asking the question perhaps we just saw a bit of a flu/cold spike that just saw off people that were end of life anyway. Why is that a hard concept to accept? Is it because it would mean admitting we had been sold a dummy? What is it about the truth we don’t like?And let's not start on the Schwab / WEF / Great Reset ones ...
July 19th probably needed to be done. It might go OK, it might be terrible. But the reasons for it aren't any of those things.
sim72 said:
You compared it to a mild flu season. Feel free to to let me know the last time a mild flu season knocked off 153,000 people and we can continue.
We were 20k deaths down on average in 2019, and 85k up in 2020, so net 60k extra deaths. In 2015 we were 45k up from the year previously, and we didn’t even notice. Your 153k figure is over 2 years and just doesn’t really register quite frankly as anything over the norm, as much as you want it to. What happens when you have a series of years of old people not dying, is that they get older, and at some point they will all die, resulting in a higher death rate of that age group at a particular time. You need to understand this
g4ry13 said:
RSTurboPaul said:
Door-to-door 'high pressure' vaccine salesmen in Yorkshire?
https://twitter.com/JemsStock/status/1413309294179...
(the comment by 'Green StockJems' under the video)
Link no longer working / video pulled.https://twitter.com/JemsStock/status/1413309294179...
(the comment by 'Green StockJems' under the video)
Elysium said:
Apologies. Fat finger typo.
The thing I find a bit weird about this (well, one of many things...) is that the 'true' Case Fatality Rate must be a lot higher if the original meaning of 'case' is used - i.e. medical professional diagnosed illness, followed up by confirmatory test.Surely the end result of all this nonsensical asymptomatic testing and re-branding of a 'case' is that the CFR will be much lower, which will make all the money spent and all the long term damage done look... excessive when compared to, say, influenza CFR and the (lack of) response to that?
Unless the plan is testing everything that moves for everything possible, every week for the rest of time, in which case all the CFRs for everything will change?
RSTurboPaul said:
Er, wtf?
That seems to be saying that they are using 40 or 45 cycle threshold at the present time, and have been for months??
EDIT: It's FOI reference 07.21.04
Why keep changing the test cycles? April isn’t that long ago and conveniently cases started going up to justify the June unlock being cancelled That seems to be saying that they are using 40 or 45 cycle threshold at the present time, and have been for months??
EDIT: It's FOI reference 07.21.04
Edited by RSTurboPaul on Friday 9th July 20:05
jameswills said:
We were 20k deaths down on average in 2019, and 85k up in 2020, so net 60k extra deaths. In 2015 we were 45k up from the year previously, and we didn’t even notice. Your 153k figure is over 2 years and just doesn’t really register quite frankly as anything over the norm, as much as you want it to.
What happens when you have a series of years of old people not dying, is that they get older, and at some point they will all die, resulting in a higher death rate of that age group at a particular time. You need to understand this
If these numbers are correct they are absolutely in the same ballpark, and that’s before we get to stuff like died “of vs with”.What happens when you have a series of years of old people not dying, is that they get older, and at some point they will all die, resulting in a higher death rate of that age group at a particular time. You need to understand this
Then it was overwhelmingly the same group of people killed meaning we need to look at the incremental difference.
Doesn’t feel like the worse pandemic in 100 years.
Of course a coronavirus is different to influenza, but the original point is credible and worthy of discussion without bucketing the poster as a “denier.”
sim72 said:
jameswills said:
sim72 said:
This fella might not be an typical anti-vaxxer, but is insinuating ... well, read it.
And let's not start on the Schwab / WEF / Great Reset ones ...
July 19th probably needed to be done. It might go OK, it might be terrible. But the reasons for it aren't any of those things.
Why is asking the question about whether we got this all out of proportion deemed some kind of conspiracy? Yes we had a lot of excess deaths in the extremely elderly and vulnerable the past year, but the year before that we had a lot less. And we are seeing a 17 week rolling negative excess death streak which is unprecedented. So I am not concluding, just asking the question perhaps we just saw a bit of a flu/cold spike that just saw off people that were end of life anyway. Why is that a hard concept to accept? Is it because it would mean admitting we had been sold a dummy? What is it about the truth we don’t like?And let's not start on the Schwab / WEF / Great Reset ones ...
July 19th probably needed to be done. It might go OK, it might be terrible. But the reasons for it aren't any of those things.
I don’t agree that covid was a mild flu season.
Wasn’t the government briefed in late 2019 to expect a particularly bad flu season in 2019/20 winter?
dmahon said:
If these numbers are correct they are absolutely in the same ballpark, and that’s before we get to stuff like died “of vs with”.
Then it was overwhelmingly the same group of people killed meaning we need to look at the incremental difference.
Doesn’t feel like the worse pandemic in 100 years.
Of course a coronavirus is different to influenza, but the original point is credible and worthy of discussion without bucketing the poster as a “denier.”
They are correct. When this is all over we will look back and see that all that happened is old and very ill people died, like they normally do. Then it was overwhelmingly the same group of people killed meaning we need to look at the incremental difference.
Doesn’t feel like the worse pandemic in 100 years.
Of course a coronavirus is different to influenza, but the original point is credible and worthy of discussion without bucketing the poster as a “denier.”
That’s it. End of story.
Tory MPs deleting NHS App so they can go on holiday, lol:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e28e84f8-dfd5-1...
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e28e84f8-dfd5-1...
The Times said:
...
Even Conservative MPs were said to be disabling their apps and going into self-imposed quarantine before their holidays to avoid being told to isolate.
...
One Tory MP said that the slogan being bandied about in the Commons tea room was: “Stay home. Protect the holiday. Save your marriage.”
Several MPs told The Times that they knew of colleagues who had deleted or disabled the app. “Colleagues are starting to work out they’re highly likely to get pinged as things open up and cases rise,” one MP said, adding that some were going into self-imposed isolation to avoid this.
...
Even Conservative MPs were said to be disabling their apps and going into self-imposed quarantine before their holidays to avoid being told to isolate.
...
One Tory MP said that the slogan being bandied about in the Commons tea room was: “Stay home. Protect the holiday. Save your marriage.”
Several MPs told The Times that they knew of colleagues who had deleted or disabled the app. “Colleagues are starting to work out they’re highly likely to get pinged as things open up and cases rise,” one MP said, adding that some were going into self-imposed isolation to avoid this.
...
sim72 said:
dmahon said:
sim72 said:
It's probably quite good that PH is a very niche audience, because the number of virus deniers and anti-vaxxers has risen so highly on this thread over the last couple of weeks that it's entirely unsurprising that large numbers of people are convinced that various nonsense is true. Is Twitter sending us idiots?
And that's coming from someone who thinks that going ahead on July 19 is the best idea ... because the alternative is a far more stupid idea.
I have read this thread since day 1 and also follow a few other “anti lockdown” threads.And that's coming from someone who thinks that going ahead on July 19 is the best idea ... because the alternative is a far more stupid idea.
I don’t think I’ve ever read a comment denying that it exists.
The comparisons with flu of course accept that coronavirus and influenza are different, but are raising discussing points comparing scale/severity/strategy as more and more metrics land in the same ballpark.
I don’t think I’ve ever read a comment that does not agree vaccines are good for vulnerable people.
Covid deniers and anti vaxxers are a myth created to discredit valid arguments. I would expect someone who has been following the debate as long as you have to know better.
jameswills said:
Is there a danger we have simply got our knickers in a twist over basically a mild flu season?
This is a COVID denier. They might not specifically claim that it doesn't exist, but anyone who is claiming that 153,000 deaths is "a mild flu season" is not only provably wrong, but is merely repeating nonsense from social media. nelly1 said:
This fella might not be an typical anti-vaxxer, but is insinuating ... well, read it.
And let's not start on the Schwab / WEF / Great Reset ones ...
July 19th probably needed to be done. It might go OK, it might be terrible. But the reasons for it aren't any of those things.
Do you think excess deaths are the best measure of impact of a pandemic. If not, what is?
SAGE being weirdly positive:
SAGE says Covid cases will start to fall within weeks 'because of vaccines, natural immunity and seasonality' - despite explosion in England's outbreak
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9773049/S...
SAGE says Covid cases will start to fall within weeks 'because of vaccines, natural immunity and seasonality' - despite explosion in England's outbreak
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9773049/S...
RSTurboPaul said:
SAGE being weirdly positive:
SAGE says Covid cases will start to fall within weeks 'because of vaccines, natural immunity and seasonality' - despite explosion in England's outbreak
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9773049/S...
It will start to fall within weeks. Just might be 3 weeks or 30. SAGE says Covid cases will start to fall within weeks 'because of vaccines, natural immunity and seasonality' - despite explosion in England's outbreak
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9773049/S...
Nothing will be as bad as the frothers in SAGE think
RSTurboPaul said:
There is some Cops on Camera on Channel 5 tonight showing a load of pissed of geordie lads being 'force vaccinated' late at night dated December 2011 if you believe thats what is going on there.https://twitter.com/husserl80/status/1413230240466... < people will literally lap anything up if it fits what they want it to be.
So there is that and nurses being paid 200 quid to 'keep quiet'... any other social media gems people are going to chuck into this thread ?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff